Are proper cameras doomed?

When out and about these days, I sometimes become very conscious of the fact I am the only one around using 'proper' camera, i.e. one which is dedicated to photo-taking, and not something which is primarily a communications device with the camera function as really no more than a (hardware) "app". And even I no longer use a DSLR, preferring a compact or M4/3 device.
I seem to recall even EPZ's commander-in-chief has stated he uses his smartphone, quite a bit, to take photos. Shock, horror! [epzimg]shocked-light.jpg[/epzimg] [epzimg]tongue-light.jpg[/epzimg]
So whilst we may continue to [u]buy[/u] cameras, do we - in reality - increasingly leave them at home and take photos on our mobiles? With perhaps our most important pics, of family and friends and events (expected or unexpected) having been taken with a phone.
With the proper camera only used for those (ahem! ;)) unforgettable shots of landscapes, robins, water droplets, ladies with a paucity of clothing etc?

When out and about these days, I sometimes become very conscious of the fact I am the only one around using 'proper' camera, i.e. one which is dedicated to photo-taking, and not something which is primarily a communications device with the camera function as really no more than a (hardware) "app". And even I no longer use a DSLR, preferring a compact or M4/3 device.

I seem to recall even EPZ's commander-in-chief has stated he uses his smartphone, quite a bit, to take photos. Shock, horror!

So whilst we may continue to buy cameras, do we - in reality - increasingly leave them at home and take photos on our mobiles? With perhaps our most important pics, of family and friends and events (expected or unexpected) having been taken with a phone.

With the proper camera only used for those (ahem! ) unforgettable shots of landscapes, robins, water droplets, ladies with a paucity of clothing etc?

The modern digital camera has become a piece of computer hardware and is produced and marketed in much the same way. Advances in technology are released at a pace to generate business. I well remember the furore that the early 486 computers caused and the frenzy that surrounded their release, yet they were dead in the water within a couple of years.
The major manufacturers are only interested in selling units. This is fine as a shareholder but not good as a consumer. I still believe that the number of whistles and bells and the power of the sensor are way beyond what is required and have been for some time.
It is therefore quite possible that many people leave their all singing all dancing dslrs at home and use their high end mobiles as the resulting images are often only viewed on said device or on a non photographically optimised pc or mac.

The modern digital camera has become a piece of computer hardware and is produced and marketed in much the same way. Advances in technology are released at a pace to generate business. I well remember the furore that the early 486 computers caused and the frenzy that surrounded their release, yet they were dead in the water within a couple of years.
The major manufacturers are only interested in selling units. This is fine as a shareholder but not good as a consumer. I still believe that the number of whistles and bells and the power of the sensor are way beyond what is required and have been for some time.
It is therefore quite possible that many people leave their all singing all dancing dslrs at home and use their high end mobiles as the resulting images are often only viewed on said device or on a non photographically optimised pc or mac.

The advent of Facebook, the "cloud", and always on internet connections on phones, the ability we have even now to take a photo on our phones and have it shared instantly with everyone is a compelling idea. And a horrifying one!
I remember installing the Google+ app on my 'droid and discovering only later that every photo I took on my phone was being uploaded and shared with the world....
I do like the ability to [i]choose [/i]to share a photo, and I use it quite regularly on Facebook... but I will stick with a dedicated camera for now for those photos that I want to print large and exhibit. I don't care how many pixels a camera phone has, they still can't beat the quality of a DSLR.

The advent of Facebook, the "cloud", and always on internet connections on phones, the ability we have even now to take a photo on our phones and have it shared instantly with everyone is a compelling idea. And a horrifying one!
I remember installing the Google+ app on my 'droid and discovering only later that every photo I took on my phone was being uploaded and shared with the world....

I do like the ability to choose to share a photo, and I use it quite regularly on Facebook... but I will stick with a dedicated camera for now for those photos that I want to print large and exhibit. I don't care how many pixels a camera phone has, they still can't beat the quality of a DSLR.

[quote]I don't care how many pixels a camera phone has, they still can't beat the quality of a DSLR[/quote]
On a site such as EPZ, I would expect that to be the general view, but - out there in the real world - camera phone photos have become 'good enough' (for most users anyway) and I have noticed friends of mine, who used to use small compacts, just don't bother using them any more... even though the cameras have the advantages of optical zoom, better sensor etc.
Quality has become less ([i]way[/i] less) important than convenience.

Quote:I don't care how many pixels a camera phone has, they still can't beat the quality of a DSLR

On a site such as EPZ, I would expect that to be the general view, but - out there in the real world - camera phone photos have become 'good enough' (for most users anyway) and I have noticed friends of mine, who used to use small compacts, just don't bother using them any more... even though the cameras have the advantages of optical zoom, better sensor etc.

If carabosse is correct, and im sure he is, this will negate the old [i]trade up as you improve [/i] system...if you only use your images on the taking device or a web share site the need for quality will dissapear from the mainstream and this will slow the release of high end gear...its always about the predictable number of units to be sold!!

If carabosse is correct, and im sure he is, this will negate the old trade up as you improve system...if you only use your images on the taking device or a web share site the need for quality will dissapear from the mainstream and this will slow the release of high end gear...its always about the predictable number of units to be sold!!

I have a phone with one of the best cameras but don't even consider using it and would rather carry my DLSR with me, I have worked hard to improve my photography with the help of you guys on this site and don't want to throw all that away, so I for one will stick with a proper camera.

I have a phone with one of the best cameras but don't even consider using it and would rather carry my DLSR with me, I have worked hard to improve my photography with the help of you guys on this site and don't want to throw all that away, so I for one will stick with a proper camera.

[quote]have a phone with one of the best cameras but don't even consider using it and [b]would rather carry my DLSR with me[/b][/quote]
What - at all times?
I too have a phone with an excellent camera but ergonomically it is not very good to use... rounded edges - it slipped out of my hands the other day while I was attempting to use the camera on it - for the first time in months! So I tend to carry a shirt-pocket compact (Canon Ixus) with me unless I'm just popping down to the shops.

Quote:have a phone with one of the best cameras but don't even consider using it and would rather carry my DLSR with me

What - at all times?

I too have a phone with an excellent camera but ergonomically it is not very good to use... rounded edges - it slipped out of my hands the other day while I was attempting to use the camera on it - for the first time in months! So I tend to carry a shirt-pocket compact (Canon Ixus) with me unless I'm just popping down to the shops.

I suspect one of the reasons that phone cameras are becoming so popular is the pleasing look of the images...I would think the processing software within the device is optimised to produce the best possible instant image, much like the jpegs from a compact or entry level dslr.
Both my early Contax digital compact and my current Panasonic LX3 produce wonderful instant jpegs requiring no effort to make 15 by100 cm prints wereas the raw files from my Nikon D90 require all my skills and knowledge to get the best from them and their relevant software.
I would not consider a phone camera other than an emergency, and will no doubt continue to try and match the results I got from my Nikon F3s and ED lenses using slow slide film...stuart

I suspect one of the reasons that phone cameras are becoming so popular is the pleasing look of the images...I would think the processing software within the device is optimised to produce the best possible instant image, much like the jpegs from a compact or entry level dslr.
Both my early Contax digital compact and my current Panasonic LX3 produce wonderful instant jpegs requiring no effort to make 15 by100 cm prints wereas the raw files from my Nikon D90 require all my skills and knowledge to get the best from them and their relevant software.
I would not consider a phone camera other than an emergency, and will no doubt continue to try and match the results I got from my Nikon F3s and ED lenses using slow slide film...stuart

[quote]On a site such as EPZ, I would expect that to be the general view, but - out there in the real world - camera phone photos have become 'good enough' (for most users anyway)[/quote]
Because most users don't care about the quality. That's why our TVs are full of crap these days. Doesn't mean we all have to go along with that view.

Quote:On a site such as EPZ, I would expect that to be the general view, but - out there in the real world - camera phone photos have become 'good enough' (for most users anyway)

Because most users don't care about the quality. That's why our TVs are full of crap these days. Doesn't mean we all have to go along with that view.

[quote]Because most users don't care about the quality. That's why our TVs are full of crap these days. Doesn't mean we all have to go along with that view.[/quote]
True, but it may be that real cameras will become more and more of a specialist interest = lower production = higher prices (low sales volumes).
[quote]nearly all designers and many artists sadly think the taste of the masses is the ultimate yardstick.[/quote]
Yes, because they want to earn a living! ;)

Quote:Because most users don't care about the quality. That's why our TVs are full of crap these days. Doesn't mean we all have to go along with that view.

True, but it may be that real cameras will become more and more of a specialist interest = lower production = higher prices (low sales volumes).

Quote:nearly all designers and many artists sadly think the taste of the masses is the ultimate yardstick.

[quote]have a phone with one of the best cameras but don't even consider using it and would rather carry my DLSR with me
What - at all times?
Obviously not, but I do have a decent compact with me at all times which is still much better then the phone.

Quote:have a phone with one of the best cameras but don't even consider using it and would rather carry my DLSR with me

What - at all times?

Obviously not, but I do have a decent compact with me at all times which is still much better then the phone.